NATO allies agree to boost military budgets after Trump pressure
Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer, US President Donald Trump, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and Netherlands' Prime Minister Dick Schoof attend the North Atlantic Council plenary meeting at the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) summit in The Hague on June 25, 2025. Photo: AFP
Listen to article
US President Donald Trump took a victory lap at NATO's Hague summit Wednesday, joining leaders in reaffirming the "ironclad" commitment to protect each other after allies agreed to his demand to ramp up defence spending.
The unpredictable US leader appeared keen to take the plaudits as he secured a key foreign policy win by getting NATO's 32 countries to agree to meet his headline target of five percent of GDP on defence spending.
In a move that will provide reassurance to allies in Europe worried over the threat from Russia, Trump signed off on a final leaders' declaration confirming "our ironclad commitment" to NATO's collective defence pledge that an attack on one is an attack on all.
🆕 NATO Allies have agreed to invest 5% of their GDP annually in defence.
A substantial commitment in response to significant threats to our security#NATOsummit pic.twitter.com/eFgwH3pfrR — NATO (@NATO) June 25, 2025
"It's a great victory for everybody, I think, and we will be equalised," Trump said of the new spending commitment, ahead of the summit's main session.
Diplomats said that behind closed doors Trump insisted there was no greater ally than Washington and urged others to spend some of the new money on US weaponry.
Read More: Trump casts doubt on mutual defence
The deal hatched by NATO is a compromise that allows Trump to claim triumph, while in reality providing wiggle room for cash-strapped governments in Europe.
It sees countries promise to dedicate 3.5 percent of GDP to core military spending by 2035, and a further 1.5 to broader security-related areas such as infrastructure.
Entering the meeting, leaders lined up to declare the summit's spending hike as "historic".
📸 Leaders gather for a family photo at the #NATOsummit in The Hague 🇳🇱 pic.twitter.com/3Ky9lzlIQ7 — NATO Spokesperson (@NATOpress) June 25, 2025
NATO allies say the increase is needed to counter a growing threat from Russia but also to keep Trump engaged, with the US leader long complaining that Europe spends too little on its own defence.
Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever said: "As Europeans, we should realise that our long break from history is over."
The continent needed to take responsibility for its own security "in a very difficult time", added De Wever.
(Front row from 5L) Netherlands' Prime Minister Dick Schoof, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, US President Donald Trump, Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan pose NATO country leaders for a family photo during the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Heads of State and Government summit in The Hague, on June 25, 2025. NATO leaders hold a two-day summit on June 24 and 25 in The Hague. Photo: AFP
Everything was carefully choreographed at the gathering in The Hague to keep the volatile US president on board: from chopping back the official part of the meeting to putting him up overnight in the royal palace.
Trump rattled his allies by appearing to cast some doubt on the validity of NATO's mutual defence clause -- known as Article Five of the alliance treaty -- telling reporters on the way to The Hague that it "depends on your definition. There's numerous definitions of Article Five."
But Rutte insisted Trump remained "totally committed" to the pledge -- which was reaffirmed unequivocally in the summit's final statement.
Underpinning the leaders' discussions on defence was Moscow's invasion of Ukraine, and in another sop to the demands of allies the United States allowed NATO to refer to the "long-term threat posed by Russia to Euro-Atlantic security" in the communique.
🗓️ TODAY: 32 NATO Leaders are meeting in The Hague, where they will demonstrate NATO's unity and resolve to keep our one billion people safe.
Follow @SecGenNATO, @DepSecGenNATO, @NATOpress and @NATO for the latest #NATOsummit updates
More information ⤵️ — NATO (@NATO) June 25, 2025
Though its language was watered down from previous years, the declaration also said allies would continue to support Ukraine "whose security contributes to ours" and could use money from the new spending pledge to fund military aid for Kyiv.
That came as Trump was poised to meet the war-torn country's president Volodymyr Zelensky on the summit sidelines.
Zelensky is playing a less central role here than at previous summits, to avoid a bust-up with Trump after their infamous Oval Office shouting match.
Also Read: Zelenskyy says Ukraine invited to NATO summit in The Hague
But Trump described him as a "nice guy" and added that he was talking to Russian President Vladimir Putin about the war, saying: "I think progress is being made."
But despite Rutte's insistence that Ukraine's bid for membership remains "irreversible", NATO's statement avoided any mention of Kyiv's push to join after Trump ruled it out.
Hungary's Kremlin-friendly Prime Minister Viktor Orban was more categorical. "NATO has no business in Ukraine," he said. "My job is to keep it as it is."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
3 hours ago
- Business Recorder
G7 agrees to avoid higher taxes for US and UK companies
WASHINGTON: The United States and the Group of Seven nations have agreed to support a proposal that would exempt US companies from some components of an existing global agreement, the G7 said in a statement on Saturday. The group has created a 'side-by-side' system in response to the US administration agreeing to scrap the Section 899 retaliatory tax proposal from President Donald Trump's tax and spending bill, it said in a statement from Canada, the head of the rolling G7 presidency. The G7 said the plan recognizes existing US minimum tax laws and aims to bring more stability to the international tax system. UK businesses are also spared higher taxes after the removal of Section 899 from President Donald Trump's tax and spending bill. Britain said businesses would benefit from greater certainty and stability following the agreement. Some British businesses had in recent weeks said they were worried about paying substantial additional tax due to the inclusion of Section 899, which has now been removed. 'Today's agreement provides much-needed certainty and stability for those businesses after they had raised their concerns,' finance minister Rachel Reeves said in a statement, adding that more work was need to tackle aggressive tax planning and avoidance. G7 officials said that they look forward to discussing a solution that is 'acceptable and implementable to all'. In January, through an executive order, Trump declared that the global corporate minimum tax deal was not applicable in the US, effectively pulling out of the landmark 2021 arrangement negotiated by the Biden administration with nearly 140 countries. He had also vowed to impose a retaliatory tax against countries that impose taxes on US firms under the 2021 global tax agreement. This tax was considered detrimental to many foreign companies operating in the US.
Express Tribune
4 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Israel-Iran conflict — how the world will change post-war
Listen to article The Iran-Israel short war of ballistic missile exchanges and air strikes is over. Yet the context under which this short war was fought had a deep effect on how independent states view the existing international environment. The challenge for the great powers, the regional hegemons and the medium and the ordinary powers that rally around them is simple: can this international environment in which international norms and laws are violated be allowed to endure? Does it need restructuring or can it be left unchanged? In the case of former there is all the likelihood of another sovereign state being bullied and attacked by a ruthless power; and in the case of latter the setting of a similar event can be prevented and unjust attacks on sovereign states may be stopped from reoccurring. Contextually, there is a greater realisation in the world that terrorism is being used as a pretext by individual states to further their national interests. Particularly in the case of Israel and India, two states that hold different interpretation on the matter of terrorism from rest of the world. Both states have demonstrated that diplomacy can be set aside, pushed back and unjust military action can be taken to punish states considered weak on flimsy grounds. Two matters of diplomatic significance, both related to India and Israel, suggest that there is hope that 'Islamophobia' that both these states suffer from may no more be the sickness with which the rest of the world may suffer. The American president's interference in the Indo-Pak conflict and his political preference to host Pakistan's military chief in White House is a clear message to India that Washington doesn't agree with the Indian position and its terrorism context that created the circumstances for its unwarranted aggression against Pakistan. The victim scale that had long been tilted in India's favour seems to be settling back in the balance and the US may have set the future global trend of no more viewing Pakistan from the Indian position of blaming Pakistan as a terrorist state. Add to this the recent diplomatic setback that India suffered in the meeting of the Defence Ministers in Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), when the Indian defence minister refused to sign a draft of joint statement which omitted a reference to the 22 April Pahalgam terror attack in occupied Kashmir. If there was evidence that India could share with the rest of the participating countries, surely the Indian position would have been strong in advocating the inclusion of this terrorist attack in the draft of the joint statement. Pakistan has consistently maintained the absence of such evidence and also maintained a consistent diplomatic posture that encouraged India to hold bilateral dialogue. But India believes more in bullying and subjugating Pakistan rather than treating it as an equal. In case of Israel, no American President has used the language that President Trump used when Israel violated the ceasefire agreement of which he was a guarantor. There is no doubt that President Trump is the most pro-Israel president that America ever had but when it came to the possibility of American interests being hurt, President Trump sounded determined to force Israel to change its behaviour against Iran. Tested and jolted by recent events, the international environment is not likely to remain the same. Wars are being fought in a manner unknown in previous history and how the nation states will change and adjust will determine what kind of international environment will prevail as we approach 2050. The lead up to 2050 and the pathway that leads the world there cannot be discussed without mentioning the role of the other three great powers in determining how the world travels on this pathway. Recent events prove that the US has failed to make the world safe. It has failed to construct the rules-based system in which international laws could be respected and it has also failed to ensure that states cooperate and not engage in conflicts. In case of America, it is sufficient to say that its thesis of end of history has not ended. The coming back of history is the new antithesis and under the return of great power competition this antithesis will be written by China and Russia. How America brought the world to the ending notion of its liberal order of internationalism is a topic that requires detailed answering and needs to be dealt with in a separate space and time. Here I would just like to conclude by giving some of the assumptions on how the world and the international system that runs it may be restructured given the context under which the recent wars have been fought. Dynastic politics will be on the decline and nation states ideas of freedom and liberty will not remain the same. More and more nationalism will hatch as authoritarianism will mate more frequently with ending civil liberties as more and more military preparedness will demand quashing of domestic dissent as national economies will reorganise to equip their militaries to adjust against the shifting military capabilities between the states and to maintain the fracturing balance of power. Military preparedness will trump political mindsets and create military mindsets and eventually more and more military states. Russophobia and China-phobia are considered as the greatest geopolitical threat of 21st Century. These two diseases from which the West suffers will contribute to how these great powers will challenge the international system together with the states that will rally around them. The US will regret mistreating the twenty-six years of unipolarity (1991-2017) by favouring realistic and militaristic foreign policy in promoting the order of liberal internationalism that only backfired. Disastrous foreign policy in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Lebanon, Yemen and Iran is what constituted the current international system of chaos and anarchy and which is hardly what the world deserved as America led it as a sole superpower. Nation states will no longer tolerate being at the centre of any American intrigue. Autocracies will demand intellectual climate that should support nationalism as guns will be preferred over butter in a national environment in which military preparedness will be expedited. States either grow or decay but in a reordered world fashioned by the Indian and Israeli military aggression most states will neither grow nor decay, they will spend more time, effort and resources to stay where they are as growth of militarism and not socialism will become the order of the day.
Express Tribune
5 hours ago
- Express Tribune
G7 agrees on tax exemption framework for US, UK companies
A man walk past the G7 members flags at the Manoir Richelieu before the G7 Foreign Ministers summit in La Malbaie, Quebec, Canada March 12, 2025. Photo: Reuters Listen to article The United States and the Group of Seven nations have agreed to support a proposal that would exempt US companies from some components of an existing global agreement, the G7 said in a statement on Saturday. The group has created a 'side-by-side' system in response to the US administration agreeing to scrap the Section 899 retaliatory tax proposal from President Donald Trump's tax and spending bill, it said in a statement from Canada, the head of the rolling G7 presidency. The G7 said the plan recognizes existing US minimum tax laws and aims to bring more stability to the international tax system. UK businesses are also spared higher taxes after the removal of Section 899 from President Donald Trump's tax and spending bill. Read More: G7 leaders seek unity on Ukraine and Mideast as Trump defends Putin Britain said businesses would benefit from greater certainty and stability following the agreement. Some British businesses had in recent weeks said they were worried about paying substantial additional tax due to the inclusion of Section 899, which has now been removed. "Today's agreement provides much-needed certainty and stability for those businesses after they had raised their concerns," finance minister Rachel Reeves said in a statement, adding that more work was need to tackle aggressive tax planning and avoidance. G7 officials said that they look forward to discussing a solution that is "acceptable and implementable to all". In January, through an executive order, Trump declared that the global corporate minimum tax deal was not applicable in the US, effectively pulling out of the landmark 2021 arrangement negotiated by the Biden administration with nearly 140 countries. He had also vowed to impose a retaliatory tax against countries that impose taxes on US firms under the 2021 global tax agreement. This tax was considered detrimental to many foreign companies operating in the US.
